SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(SC) 817

SUPREME COURT
, J
S. Kaleeswaran – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 160 of 2017 | Criminal Appeal No. 410 of 2017



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Dr. Joseph Aristotle S.
For the Respondents:State Advocate

Prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence essential for conviction under IPC.

Headnote:The case involves appeals against the convictions under specific sections of the IPC. The High Court dismissed earlier appeals, affirming the Trial Court's convictions based on circumstantial evidence. The Court elaborated on evidentiary standards for such cases and established that the prosecution failed to prove a complete chain of circumstances for a conviction. The verdict was overturned, leading to the appellants' acquittal.

Table of Content
1. overview of the case and the crimes charged. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments presented by the appellants and the prosecution. (Para 4 , 5)
3. discussion on evidentiary standards and circumstantial evidence. (Para 6 , 8)
4. concerns over last seen theory and body identification. (Para 9 , 13)
5. conclusion regarding the failings of prosecution evidence. (Para 14 , 15)
6. final judgment and outcome of the appeal. (Para 16 , 17)

1. Both the Criminal Appeal Nos. 160 of 2017 and 410 of 2017 are arising out of the common judgment and order dated. 22nd July 2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal Appeal Nos. 436/2014, 482/2014, 490/2014, 175/2015 and 176/2015, whereby the High Court while dismissing the said appeals has confirmed the judgment and order dated 22nd July, 2014 passed by the Sessions Judge, Coimbatore (hereinafter referred to as the “Trial Court”) in Sessions Case No. 187/2008. The Trial Court had convicted the present appellants i.e., S. Kaleeswaran (Original Accused No. 5), John Anthonisamy @ John (Original Accused No. 1) along with the other three Accused i.e., Rajesh Kumar @ Rajesh (Original Accused No. 4), R. Ganeshkumar @ Ganesh (Original Accused No. 3) and Muthumanickam @ Muthu (Original Accused No. 2) for the offence under S.120(B), S.147, S.364 and S.302 read with 120(B) / 149, 201 and 396 I.P.C., and sentenced them as detailed below:

The aggrieved appellant (Accused No. 1) John Anthonisamy @ John has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 410 of 2017 and appellant (Accused No. 5) S. Kaleeswaran has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 160 of 2017 challenging the impugned judgement passed by High Court. The other three accused have chosen not to file any appeal.


2. As per the case of the prosecution, accused no. 1 John Anthonisamy was a taxi driver, accused no. 2 Muthumanickam was a friend of accused no. 1, and accused no. 3, 4 and 5 were the friends of the accused no. 2. On 18.07.2007 at about 7 A. M., the accused no. 1 conspired with the accused no. 2 and planned to commit dacoity of an Ambassador Car bearing registration No. TN - 41 - P - 4980 and to cause the murder of John Thomas, the driver of the said car. In furtherance of the said plan, the accused made the said John Thomas to come to the Fire service car stand at Pollachi. When John Thomas arrived in the Ambassador Car at the said place, accused no. 1 made the accused no. 4 Rajesh to hire the said Ambassador Car for two hours and requested John Thomas to come by 12: 30 P. M. John Thomas accordingly arrived at the place as requested by the accused no. 1 i.e., at Sakthi Hotel, Pollachi, with his Ambassador Car. The accused no. 1 thereafter got into the car and proceeded towards Udumalpet. On 18.07.2007 at about 01: 30 P. M., the accused no. 1 and the driver John Thomas arrived at the Udumalpet bus stand, where the accused no. 2 was waiting along with accused no. 3 to 5. All the accused thereafter got into the said Ambassador Car and proceeded towards Ammapatty and at about 02: 45 P. M., all the five accused made the driver John Thomas stop the car near an isolated place on the road between Vadaboothanam and Ammapatti Road. All the accused in furtherance of the conspiracy hatched by them murdered the taxi driver John Thomas. The accused thereafter, with the intention of causing the disappearance of the evidence, buried the dead body of John Thomas in a pit. The Ambassador Car thereafter was sold out by them to one Rajendran of Thiruvarur and they shared the sale proceeds of the car. After John Thomas was missing for a week, a complaint was reported by the PW - 1 wife of John Thomas on 25.07.2007, which was registered at Pollachi (East) Police Station for missing person.

3. The investigating officer after completing the investigation had laid the charge - sheet against all the five accused. All five accused were charged by the trial court for the offences under S.120(B), S.147, S.364, S.201, S.396 I.P.C. Accused no. 3, 4 and 5 were additi






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top